Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Another "New" View of Creation
Kitsune
Member (Idle past 4301 days)
Posts: 788
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 09-16-2007


Message 61 of 64 (516499)
07-25-2009 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Phage0070
07-24-2009 1:41 PM


Re: Consciousness?
Hi Phage,
To my comment,
quote:
I have been asking what that process is, exactly. How does the tree detect those circumstances and adjust? How does the brain? Where is that missing piece between stimulus and response?
you responded,
quote:
No you have not, it does not, and there isn't a missing piece! You have not been investigating the biological action behind why a stomach grows to the size it does and stops, while not sticking to the sides of the abdominal cavity but mating its ends to the esophagus and the duodenum. You have not been asking why a femur grows into the shape of a femur, rather than just keeping adding bone randomly. And finally, you have not been asking how an eye distinguishes itself from the surrounding tissue and links up with other parts of the body.
These appear to be programmed processes, do they not? Like my clock ticking, or my fingernails growing. What I'm talking about is what happens when the pattern changes and the circumstances demand that the organism adapt or suffer. I'm not claiming that thought is going on like it does in our heads, but it appears to me that somehow a consciousness is involved with the adaptation. I'm willing to be proved wrong, if that happens as biological and genetic research advance.
quote:
The study of the brain is ongoing, and would continue even without such examples. For example: Phineas Gage
I'm willing to take on board the possibility that brain damage can profoundly alter a person's personality, and the implications for what we might call the soul. In fact I'm interested in learning more about these sorts of things because of what they could teach us. But to be fair, your link for this particular person shows that the facts in his case are far from clear. Can you find another, more modern example? . . . and remind me please what point you are making here?
quote:
Mr. G. got up and vomited; the effort of vomiting pressed out about half a teacupful of the brain, which fell upon the floor.
OK now, you're just trying to gross me out, right?
Finally, I said,
quote:
This isn't a case of simple adaptation, this is profound restructuring.
and you said,
quote:
Define the difference with something other than incredulity or rarity.
It's a simple question really. Sometimes incredulity can be valid in an investigation; if something seems highly unlikely and there's evidence for that, then you need to consider other alternatives along with your original hypothesis.
So how does a millimeter-thick brain lining produce all the functions of the different parts of a normal brain? Admittedly it would be helpful to have more exact details in the case, but I don't think they're publicly available (I've looked), so we have to go with what we've got. I think it's pretty reasonable to posit that what he has for a brain can't be functioning the way a normal brain does, would be incapable of it, and must somehow be relying at least partially on other parts of the body.
Edited by LindaLou, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Phage0070, posted 07-24-2009 1:41 PM Phage0070 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Phage0070, posted 07-25-2009 9:04 PM Kitsune has not replied

  
Phage0070
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 64 (516522)
07-25-2009 9:04 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Kitsune
07-25-2009 3:41 PM


Re: Consciousness?
LindaLou writes:
I'm not claiming that thought is going on like it does in our heads, but it appears to me that somehow a consciousness is involved with the adaptation. I'm willing to be proved wrong, if that happens as biological and genetic research advance.
That isn't how logical thought happens. Logically you should look at something that happens through programmed responses and, when it operates differently in different circumstances than normal, assume that it still operates as a programmed response unless proof otherwise is shown.
LindaLou writes:
Can you find another, more modern example? . . . and remind me please what point you are making here?
My point is that it has been known for quite a long time that it is possible to compensate for the loss of comparatively large amounts of brain matter even for an adult. Phineas Gage was helpful in sparking studies into the function of the brain, and even particular parts of the brain. Saying "this is an area that warrants further study" earlier in the thread seems to ignore the fact that this concept is not unknown. Scientists are very much aware, and have not ignored this area of study.
LindaLou writes:
I think it's pretty reasonable to posit that what he has for a brain can't be functioning the way a normal brain does, would be incapable of it, and must somehow be relying at least partially on other parts of the body.
Again, this isn't how logical thought progresses. We have evidence that a brain performs certain functions, excluding all other parts of the body. In the circumstances that the brain is very small, we still conclude that the brain performs those functions unless we have evidence that those functions have been assumed by other parts. We DON'T simply assume it isn't capable and make up some other explanation, or ghostly overseer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Kitsune, posted 07-25-2009 3:41 PM Kitsune has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Will Seamus Ennis, posted 07-27-2009 5:45 PM Phage0070 has not replied

  
Will Seamus Ennis
Junior Member (Idle past 5358 days)
Posts: 13
From: Huntsville, AL
Joined: 07-08-2009


Message 63 of 64 (516860)
07-27-2009 5:45 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Phage0070
07-25-2009 9:04 PM


Re: Consciousness?
Ah, so, but we ARE bigger than our brains. There is research to show that other cognitive and/or cognitive-enhancing processes are happening, often faster and clearer than the brain...
in the gut...
http://www.psyking.net/id36.htm
and in the heart...
HeartMath Institute
I also believe that there is extra potential in the cells that exist in the brain, latent potential for new connections that are made when old ones are destroyed or rerouted due to damage.
The pattern exists in there somewhere, in potential, written in whatever code, that isn't manifest until it's needed.
They are starting to find the "switches" in cells that respond to cell death signals from ALS and Alzheimers as shown here.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2009/02/090202174644.htm
Edited by Will Seamus Ennis, : No reason given.
Edited by Will Seamus Ennis, : grammar

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Phage0070, posted 07-25-2009 9:04 PM Phage0070 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by onifre, posted 07-27-2009 7:14 PM Will Seamus Ennis has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 64 of 64 (516870)
07-27-2009 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Will Seamus Ennis
07-27-2009 5:45 PM


Re: Consciousness?
I don't want to side track your debate but...
Ah, so, but we ARE bigger than our brains. There is research to show that other cognitive and/or cognitive-enhancing processes are happening, often faster and clearer than the brain...
This is not true.
In your above quote you seperate "us" from our "brains," as in 2 seperate things. This is very incorrect, it's the sum of all parts that the "body" makes up.
Nothing is happening faster than the brain can respond to and transmit with, what you may be refering to is that things are happening faster than you become conscious of it...which is a different thing.
- Oni

If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little.
~George Carlin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Will Seamus Ennis, posted 07-27-2009 5:45 PM Will Seamus Ennis has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024